Search from over 60,000 research works

Advanced Search

Probability functions to build composite indicators: a methodology to measure environmental impacts of genetically modified crops

[thumbnail of manuscript2.docx]
manuscript2.docx - Accepted Version (886kB)
Restricted to Repository staff only
[thumbnail of manuscript2.pdf]
Preview
manuscript2.pdf - Accepted Version (1MB) | Preview
Add to AnyAdd to TwitterAdd to FacebookAdd to LinkedinAdd to PinterestAdd to Email

Areal, F. J. and Riesgo, L. (2015) Probability functions to build composite indicators: a methodology to measure environmental impacts of genetically modified crops. Ecological Indicators, 52. pp. 498-516. ISSN 1470-160X doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.01.008

Abstract/Summary

There is an on-going debate on the environmental effects of genetically modified crops to which this paper aims to contribute. First, data on environmental impacts of genetically modified (GM) and conventional crops are collected from peer-reviewed journals, and secondly an analysis is conducted in order to examine which crop type is less harmful for the environment. Published data on environmental impacts are measured using an array of indicators, and their analysis requires their normalisation and aggregation. Taking advantage of composite indicators literature, this paper builds composite indicators to measure the impact of GM and conventional crops in three dimensions: (1) non-target key species richness, (2) pesticide use, and (3) aggregated environmental impact. The comparison between the three composite indicators for both crop types allows us to establish not only a ranking to elucidate which crop is more convenient for the environment but the probability that one crop type outperforms the other from an environmental perspective. Results show that GM crops tend to cause lower environmental impacts than conventional crops for the analysed indicators.

Altmetric Badge

Item Type Article
URI https://reading-clone.eprints-hosting.org/id/eprint/38938
Item Type Article
Refereed Yes
Divisions Life Sciences > School of Agriculture, Policy and Development > Department of Agri-Food Economics & Marketing
Publisher Elsevier
Download/View statistics View download statistics for this item

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

University Staff: Request a correction | Centaur Editors: Update this record

Search Google Scholar